New York Post sensationalizes photo of man killed by subway train

A New York tabloid newspaper has caused controversy by publishing an image of a man about to be killed by a subway train on its front cover, along with a dramatic headline. The image shows a subway train bearing down on a man who'd been pushed into its path. The paper's handling of the story has been widely criticized and it raises a range of issues over the actions of all the parties involved. Journalism school The Poynter Institute has an interesting summary, separating the different aspects about a controversy that brings a lot of difficult questions about photojournalism and news reporting. What do you think?

We will not be re-publishing the paper's cover but you should be aware that the Poynter website does.

Comments

One of the problems about the story (I live in NY) is whether the photographer should have stepped in to help. He claimed he was too far away. Should a journalist "make the news" rather than just report it? Under the "American Bystander Rule" (I teach law) there is no obligation to help unless based on a statute, relationship or contract. I just feel as a human being, he might have done SOMETHING other than just take the photo. Whether the Post should have printed it, that's a freedom of the press call that has to be made by the paper. VRR.

In looking at the photo in question.... I saw nobody being "pushed" anywhere. All I saw was an open platform and one chap standing on the tracks, grabbing onto the platform wall by one arm.

NY subways trains are designed so if you lie face down in the middle of the track, the train can by and large roll over you w/o hurting you. Grabbing the wall and just staring at the oncoming train is not something I would have done, even if I was pushed and did not just fell. If there is no time to pull yourself up from the tacks, then dive head-first on your stomach in-between the rails, and hope for the best.

Most psychopaths aren't dangerous and are not easy to identify. They live normal lives like everyone else.

What makes them psychopaths is their inability to feel sorry for others or to project their own emotional capability onto others. Therefore, they don't see anything wrong in ignoring the pain and suffering of others. Plus, they aren't able to predict the suffering of others, so when they commit horrible acts (ignoring a victim, photographing a victim, selling photos of a victim, or publishing photos of a victim) they cannot see the harm they cause to the people who love the victim (or even to people who can understand the emotional pain of his loved ones).

I have no doubt that there are many psychopaths in positions of power in the government and the media. They can easily climb to the top because they don't feel guilt when stepping on others to get there.

I listened to the interview with the photographer, and while I don't entirely buy his version of events, particularly his detached automatic reflex to take pictures and trying to signal the train operator with his flash unit, I can't help but feel the paper's editors are no better for running the photo with that tasteless 'DOOMED' than the vile scum which pranked the hospital and shamed the nurse into committing suicide.

People can be hurt by decisions. When those decisions are made in the name of increasing sales or market share they are made poorly.

The right thing to do would be turn the photos over to the police and not run them at all. I'm not surprised the paper is run by News Corporation. The defects at the helm are not unique to the east side of the big pond.

Either I wasn't able to get to the right link, or there is absolutely zero deep thought in Sonderman's article : it is no more than a collection of quotes and links. Not worth a mention in DPreview news : I'm sure there are better articles to read on the subject.

My first thought : wasn't there anyone around to help this poor guy ?

A train usually takes hundred meters to stop, depending on its speed, so there was probably not much the driver could do, but using the fash to warn th driver ? That would just blind him, preventing him to see the problem. Sounds more like the photographer trying to justify himself after the fact.

It's shocking to me how many of the people commenting here are ignoring the text of the actual story that accompanied the photo. First of all, the photographer was running towards the train trying to use his flash to alert the conductor, which the conductor later said he could see but could do nothing about. Second, after the accident, there was a doctor on scene that did all she could to save the man. It's not like he stood around shooting and submitted a portfolio of photos from the incident (although that would have been reasonable for a photographer to do)...this is likely just the most clear photo from what came out of him running and pressing the shutter button of his camera.

Post did what they do and were damn lucky photog was present. BTW, you listen to him tell his tale and I believe you would understand he did what he could and that closer citizens are the real criminals.

Headline deplorable. I've not seen the photos. We all think we will be the one to enter the burning building, not shoot the exterior, that we would leap forward saving a person from an oncoming car or leap down to save someone about to die on subway tracks. Perhaps you might. Perhaps not. As for the photos I am "not" him. I do not know his motives. I have avoided taking shots of some accidents I've passed while others have been captured. Talking about photojournalists in war zones in comparison to this is a huge reach. We all carry cameras, we all instinctively grab-a-shot as its seen. Some of the people on the platform where frozen, some backed away, others thought, in the seconds before this sad event, "Should I help?", one snapped shots. Then sold them. We each make our own judgements, we each have a view of ourselves that in most cases has never been tested. This was tragic. The Posts headline, tragic, but very "Post". Condolences to the family

The photographer should be pushed in front of a train along w/ the guy who did the pushing. Add the NY Post's editor to that list and we'll make the world a better place.

He took 45 photos...internal flash would have been at full power w/ those dim conditions...it should have been more like 90 seconds instead of the 22 he claims. He just made a lot of excuses publically so the non-thinking public would think he didn't have time to do anything and the photos were just a mistake where he could crop stuff out...

Maybe DPreview is the company sensationalizing the photo, not the NY Post. After all the word sensationalize is a subjective and not something quantifiable. The NY Post headline is accurate -- the man is in fact about to die. I'm not a fan of the Post, but that's for many other reasons. A photographer photographs, a Newspaper prints the news -- both are behaving within the parameters of their job descriptions. And I agree with Gary regarding the current trend to vilify photographers. Weegee stated, "You can't be a nice Nellie and do photography." Additionally, if you want to see real black and white photography check out my site: http://www.danwagnerphotography.com I don't need a user name, I use my real name. "All the news that's fit to print." -- oops that's the other paper.

The photograph isn't a problem. Photojournalist capture real events all the time all around the world--that is our job. The sensationalized Headline of Doom--this man is about to die is deplorable and insensitive. This ongoing attack on photojournalist and aggressive hate towards us doing our jobs is ridiculous. The photo isn't horrible--the way the newspaper presented and the context in which is was presented is shameful. I don't think this should have been presented as a front page photo--but that's my opinion. What about all the war photographers? Are they despicable too for doing their job and photographing people getting shot and killed in battle? Stop vilifying photographers and photojournalism.

This is just the latest example of the media exploiting innocent people to make money.

How many times have we seen family members of people who have died being ambushed at their front door by TV crews?

The bottom line is that while this is offensive it is no more so than the way the media have treated people in the past.

It's clear the major media only cares about their own profits and most major media reporters only care about their career advancement. The suffering they inflict on innocent people-- relatives of killing victims, relatives of people who die in disasters, people accused of crimes but with no criminal record, etc-- apparently means nothing to them.

On a less severe note are the paparazzi who refuse to acknowledge that even famous people have some right to privacy, at least when they're in their own homes.

Well said. The difference between true journalism and the current media in general, is quite wide. Current media in general, the worst of it at least, seem terribly desperate for $/attention at the cost of others. Deplorable and disgusting it is. Good thing is, not all media is like that, so at least there is some hope and high standard out there.

Don't blame the messenger. The newspaper took the photograph and sensationalized it. There was nothing wrong with the photograph. The photographer did his job and a good one. It was the paper that improperly used the photo and presented it in a way with headlines that were tastesless and offensive. Paparrazi have the right to do their job--any famous person that goes in public or any person for that matter shouldn't expect any privacy in public spaces. We can't control newspapers and how they use our photographs, but I'll be damned if I stop shooting a tragedy---someone needs to document what happens for the authorities and news. I recall that tianamon square masacre in China wouldn't have been known the world around if the press and photographers hadn't gotten the word and photos out. Fascist suppression of the press by totalitarian governments is what you will have if you continue to attack photographers for doing their job.

You could not have saved the individual involved because you would have been blocked by all those in the picture that were rushing to his aid. Obviously, I'm being facetious. I said that only to point out the possibility that others who may have tried to provide assistance may simply not had the time to do so, which may explain their absence from the photograph. (Yes they could be cropped out, but if so, no one is shown within six to eight feet of the man) If others did not save him, then how could you fault the photographer and say he could have saved the man. You simply do not know. Would I have tried?...Yes. Should he have tried?....Yes (if possible). Can I fault him?.....No

I guess all the journalists and photographers that captured the carnage of World War II, the Korean War, Viet Nam etc., were cruel, inhumane and devoid of compassion. How could they stand by recording historical events when they could have joined in. Heck, wouldn't have needed to fight to assist, just give a hand to the Medics on the battlefield. You know....try to help save lives. Damn them....a camera in hand on Iwo Jima when they could have carried medical supplies and applied pressure points!!!! I can never look at my camera in the same way, ever again.

At least Michael Herr took up arms in Viet Nam (his 'Dispatches' - originally written for Rolling Stones - formed the basic of the first half of Apocalypse Now), when a machine gun was given to him at a unusually dangerous moment.

Same goes for a lot of other journalists, both in WWII (like Ernest Hemingway's very active role), and at other times.

Oh man, I feel so naïve. I actually thought there was a difference between an embedded PJ in a war-torn area and some tabloid staff photog snapping pics (with hopes of a cover???) on his train ride to lunch. Thanks for setting me straight, jimrb67!

Jimrb67, I didn't know there was an on-going war in New York... I guess the guy who took that photo on the subway risked his life to be able to report about this to us, the same way those photographers in Nam and Korea or WWII did. I have heard that New York is a dangerous place to be at, but never knew it was comparable with WWII and other war zones.

BTW, didn't you know that the Iwo Jima pic with the flag is a fake and Capa risked nothing for that image?

If you can't look at your camera in the "same way, ever again", then stop taking pictures.Simple. But I bet you won't feel better because you stop.

Nick Ut's picture of the "Napalm Girl" had a PROFOUND effect on the Vietnam War and affected the course of history.

I watched Umar Abassi's interview on the Today Show and felt sorry for him. He defended his rationalization for taking the pic by pathetically exploring that his image would "create a dialog for change".

Change what?

Change the fact he just witnessed a murder in an otherwise peaceful environment and did nothing about it OR create some change about how subway platforms are designed OR change how society treats the homeless?

Puhlease, this guy has NO agenda other than to profit from his pic.

There is a fine line between being a photojournalist and being a human being. Nick Ut chose to put the camera down.

Umar, and the Post, choose to hide behind the veil of photojournalism.

Olyflyer....you surely are also aware that in addition to the "staged" picture with the flag after the original flag-raising, there were OTHER pictures taken on Iwo Jima during the entire, hard-fought battle!

The only consolation I can find in this whole inhuman demoralizing event, is the confidence that lawyers will be coming out of the woodwork to act for his surviving relatives to sue the New York Post into complete oblivion.

Wow, it's astonishing to hear people say they commend the photog for "doing his job" and contributing to the harsh and compelling world of PJ. Good Robot: you earned your wage - a small fee for the soul-stain of choosing self interest over basic human decency. When someone's instincts are to take pictures of a looming catastrophe as opposed to trying to avert it (like yelling "lie down in the middle of the tracks!" (a space that in most NYC stations will accommodate a person - if there aren't piles of garbage or spare rails filling it)) you really should question their humanity. I agree, something like this happens fast, but I take NYC trains every day and there's plenty of time to at least try to help. All you "REAL" photogs who pop off shots in an emergency situation for some pathetic "artistic glory" (cash), better hope a "FAKE" photog like me isn't around to shove your DSLR up your a**! (of course, after I've done my best to help anybody who might actually need a hand)

The Post is not a tabloid it is a daily newspaper that's been around since the 1950's. And you think the NY Times doesn't print that sort of photo, anyone remember the execution of the Viet Cong prisoner being shot in the head on a street in Saigon by a Vietnamese police officer in the aftermath of Tet 1968?

Those of you who pump their chests and boost " I would have saved him ", are just braggarts who have more than likely never been in a life and death situation. Finally, Poynter and many others, you can't have it both ways.

There is no proof that the guy shot was Viet Cong, is there?! But they guy with the gun was Saigonäs chief of police, that's beyond doubt!

Remember that the founding fathers of Viet Nam was Colby (later CIA chief) and Ho Chi Ming, and that the Vietnamese struggle for independence from France was orchestrated by the US - see the Ten Thousand Day War, a lovely, inspiring, book written by a US Marine, that became an author.

He was VC. Have you any idea how many civilians were murdered by the VC in Saigon? His only problem (the police chief) was he got caught by the press. I don't have to watch bull carp documentaries financed by public television with an agenda. Why? I was in Vietnam when Tet happened in 1968. The story is not about Vietnam, the story is about a double standard. The 1st Amendment is sacred. I fought for that. When you pick up a camera a take a picture, as long as your not breaking any laws, your protected. Even if that guy was a scum sucker for taking it. As it turns out that photo will be used to convict the dirt bag who murdered the guy. Ironic isn't it?

To do nothing and watch someone die when you could have tried to help is patheticly inhuman. To have your first instinct be to take a picture before you do nothing to help, is even worse. (It's nobody's "job" to stand by and do nothing while someone is killed when you could have helped in that 22 seconds prior to the death.)

If I were there with a camera handy, I would have taken the picture. It's not an action I would have thought about, grabbing my camera and taking the picture would have been automatic, providing, of course, that there was no way I could help that fellow back onto the platform.

The image is horrific, but it does depict the very worst aspect of the human condition.

People are so scared of death that we live our lives as if we were immortal. This photograph reminds us that our time here is limited, and that we should strive to get the most out of the limited time we have here.

I'm not a fan of the NY Post. Quite the opposite. However, this was a news story and the photo is strong and deserved to be published. As for helping the man -- it depends upon how much time there was. Lifting the man by the arms would have been incredibly difficult. The man should have stood in the archway in the concrete wall to his right. That's where train workers stand. The photograph was taken from far away -- equidistant from the train. The photographer isn't a superman.

I've lived in NYC most of my life. This kind of thing is so rare. Don't argue with the crazies. Stay away from edge of platform until train has stopped moving. You would be surprised how many people hang out by the edge.

Well, it's a tragedy, but the NY Post and photographer are not at fault.

Many people here defend the publication of this image, but what do you find interesting in this image? Except some voyeurism?

Only answer I can find is that it makes me react because things like this should not happen. Let's find ways to make this impossible. You can not have a cop behind everyone?

So here is an idea: in a nearby city, the subways are accessible only through doors that open after the cars have stopped. The platform is isolated from the tracks with a plexiglass wall, and the wagons stop precisely so that the plexi doors and wagons doors are aligned.

Most likely, our municipal subway systems do not have the money for such an expensive retrofit. And you can just imagine the maintenance costs and delays when the train fails to line up with the doors. Here in the Boston area, we can't even afford the technology that keeps trains from crashing into each other when the drivers fall asleep or are texting their girlfriends. So I don't see it happening.

Simple answer: Cost. The rarity of this event would not justify the cost to implement a safety barrier you describe.What needs to be done is education. What should one do if they find themselvse in this situation?

From the photo it looks like if I'd been there he'd have lived.I wouldn't have had a camera up for more than a quarter of a second : it takes large arm movements to sprint at full speed and that's the ONLY proper action to take.

Exactly true - and I've always really disliked the phrase "Good Samaritan". Think about it: That story labeling someone a good Samaritan implies that anyone from Samaria is an a$$hole who wouldn't stop to help anyone. Apply that to our current world - "Oh, he's okay - he's a good (insert racial slur here)."

The Post clearly is only looking for sensationalism. They are disgusting. I also wonder where anyone else was to help this man? Were no New Yorkers around? The photographer for one is an idiot, but that does not excuse all other people.

The person in teh photo is an idiot. All you have to do is lay down in the tracks, they are made for that. Or he could have run the opposite way, this is far down the subway track so the train is slowing and near stopped.

The New York Post is the bottom of the barrel. They publish for the mentally deficient, exploiting any and everyone to make money. This photographer chooses to be part of it. Not much of a life. And not somebody I'd want to know.

I wonder what WeeGee was like. Is there a line you won't cross for a photo? Wondering the same about myself.

No amount of saying could excuse a person not to do something to save the fellow human being but taking a train of pictures (40+). The picture says more about the photographer and the NYPost editing manager than the tragedy in the picture. God bless us all.

So you are out saving lives left and right? Or is it only if you happen to be in the area of someone about to die. People die senseless deaths all over the world on a daily basis. What have you done to prevent a single death?

How quickly we forget Eddie Adams' photo of General Nguyễn Ngọc Loan's execution of Nguyen Van Lem. Or, Kevin Carter's photo of the child and the vulture of the Sudan. (and yes, I realise Carter's photo was a matter of perspective and he likely chased the bird away)

Rather than beating them up on the internet, we simply gave them Pulitzers. Perhaps if this was on the cover of time magazine rather than the post, we'd all be looking at this a little differently...

It's simply journalisim, bringing you the worst, and best parts of humanity since the dawn of time. Shame on us for being so hypercritical of a situation none of us actually participated in.

You are wrong. In this particular situation, this person COULD HAVE HELPED. (someone held my arms and picked me out of a river many years ago.. if he had decided to take a youtube video, i would have been dead).In the other situations you mention, it was impossible to interupt the outcome without putting the photographer in danger.apples and oranges, Matthew.

I am guessing you were there to witness the event to make such a judgement that this person could have helped? Looks to me like the photog and the train were equal distance from the guy on the tracks. If the photog could have beat the trane and lifted this grown man by his arms without himself falling in front of the train, then it's also seemingly safe to assume that the guy on the tracks could have outrun the train. Right? Sigh....

I downloaded the image and tried to study the details, although only from 525 x 325 px. I lightened the image, and interestingly, in the left upper corner, the passengers seem to be so close to the train that it looks like they're already exiting or entering the car(s).Since the doors don't / can't / shouldn't open until the train comes to a complete halt, it suggests that the train was stationary, or at least moving at a crawling speed. Please check for yourself.

I think it is people congregating on the platform as they wait for the train to stop. Note there is a gap between the edge of the train and the wall of the station which extends back into the tunnel and creates a shadow. You may be confusing that shadow with forms on the platform which resemble people. I certainly can't make out enough detail to discern people boarding/deboarding the train. And it would make no sense, if you think about it. Why would the train start from a stop and then run him over?

Well, it's a low-res image and details are hard to distinguish since it's probably printed at 32 or 48 dpi. The local TV showed it too, with NY mayor talking about it, so the story has to be true. As the left side of the picture in the paper has been cropped off, I became interested in the content below the Exit sign. It could have been cut on the right edge with no loss of information, and probably better cadred for it.Anyway, it never hurts to look for details.

The same happened here in the UK, but it was caught on CCTV, and was caused by the train guard (conductor in the USA). I'm not aware of anyone publishing pictures though, other than were released officially from the CCTV.

How nice it is, sitting home commenting upon the things that happen "only to other people"! What's been discussed here is something we all share in. It's our World: we produce the sickos and desperados, the deranged and PTSD'd, and those vast unhappy masses that we choose to ignore - unless they do something "spectacular"! We are those who buy the sensationalism, enabling it to flourish. We think there is no news unless it's about some sort of cataclysm or grief, or about what some mannequin eats, or what some idiot millionaire plays with. It's us who make the news editors choose what to publish, or we don't buy their product. And tomorrow - someone else dies. News...We got here to read a bare description of something that has hapenned - and feel qualified to comment upon other people's actions or lack of actions, whatever the real circumstances were. We are ready to condemn the photog who didn't do what Superman would...Really, some comments here horrify more than the actual photo.

From the photog himself:"The victim was so far away from me, I was already too far away to reach him when I started running.The train hit the man before I could get to him, and nobody closer tried to pull him out ...I have to say I was surprised at the anger over the pictures, of the people who are saying: Why didn’t he put the camera down and pull him out?But I can’t let the armchair critics bother me. They were not there. They have no idea how very quickly it happened.They do not know what they would have done."http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/anguished_fotog_critics_are_unfair_s4bWwIXfZlBR6wi2tQALyH

a bunch of ethical superheroes commenting on this dpreview non-story here, I see. who knew we had so many marvel xmen and women who regularly post in these comment sections.

Nobody can comment on what could have been made by the photographer to rescue this man. Of course I, you, everybody thinks that we would have dropped the camera and run to pull out of the tracks the potential victim but that's pure speculation, a dream, something possible to imagine AFTER, but very unlikely when you face the situation. We're all heroes in our soul and sofa...

Kudos to DPR not to post this shot and a simple prayer for this man and his family.

Chilling, depressing photo which serves no purpose other than maybe highlight more policing needed in the NYC subways? I think the photog could have saved the man if he sprinted hard and forgot about his camera..

Yes, i think it's a relevant post on dpreview because the majority of people who log onto this site could end up in the same situation as this photog.

20x10 hindsight is a wonderful thing. Look at the picture long enough, and it improves to 20x5. You'll sure be ready to sprint the next time you witness a crash, crime, fight, or fall. But sprint which way?

Latest in-depth reviews

The Nikon Z6 may not offer the incredible resolution of its sibling, the Z7, but its 24MP resolution is more than enough for most people, and the money saved can buy a lot of glass. Find out what's new and notable about the Z6 in our First Impressions Review.

Many cameras today include built-in image stabilization systems, but when it comes to video that's still no substitute for a proper camera stabilization rig. The Ronin-S aims to solve that problem for DSLR and mirrorless camera users, and we think DJI has delivered on that promise.

The SiOnyx Aurora is a compact camera designed to shoot stills and video in color under low light conditions, so we put it to the test under the northern lights and against a Nikon D5. It may not be a replacement for a DSLR, but it can complement one well for some uses.

At its core, the Scanza is an easy-to-use multi-format film scanner. It offers a quick and easy way to scan your film negatives and slides into JPEGs, but costs a lot more than similar products without a Kodak label.

Latest buying guides

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

For the past few weeks, our readers have been voting on their favorite photographic gear released in the past year in a wide range of categories. Now that the first round of voting is over, it's time to pick the best overall product of 2018.

Sony had the full-frame mirrorless market to itself for nearly five years, but it's no longer alone – the Nikon Z6 and Canon EOS R have both arrived priced to compete with the a7 III. We take a head to head to head look at these three cameras.

As if it needed one, the triple-camera smartphone might really be the final nail in the compact camera's coffin. DPR contributor Lars Rehm brought the LG V40 on a hiking trip recently and found it to be a huge leap forward in terms of creative freedom.

Renowned UK-based landscape photographer Nigel Danson has been using DSLRs for years. In this video, created exclusively for DPReview, Nigel discusses his experience using the Nikon Z7 and why he's excited about mirrorless cameras. (Spoiler... beautiful scenery ahead.)

Chinese optical manufacturer Kipon has added the Nikon Z and Canon R mounts to its range of adapters made to attach medium format lenses from Hasselblad, Mamiya, Pentax and others to full frame cameras.